Methodology

How we rate what we publish

GroundCurrent’s rule is simple: content can be compelling, but data must be accurate. Two separate labels appear on every project so you always know both where a project stands and how sure we are.

Evidence levels: how sure we are

Evidence levels describe the quality of the sources behind a project or a specific claim. They only move up when better evidence is found, and we record when that happened.

A rumor can never be anything other than “Possible”. A rumor is never shown in totals such as planned megawatts or documented water demand. Disputed claims are shown with both sides and are not counted as facts.

Company statements count as “Official” evidence of a company’s own intentions (for example, that it plans a 300 MW campus) but not as independent evidence of impacts (for example, that noise will be minimal).

Project stages: where it stands

Comparison figures

Comparisons such as “enough electricity for 400,000 homes” are estimates that make large numbers easier to grasp. They are always labeled as estimates and use these published assumptions:

Corrections

If we got something wrong, tell us through the tip form. Corrections are recorded as timeline events so the history is visible, not overwritten.

What we do not do